How polluted is 1/8?

John Payne john at sackheads.org
Wed Feb 3 16:25:17 CST 2010


On Feb 3, 2010, at 3:10 PM, Joel M Snyder wrote:

> 
>> Having this data is useful, but I can't help to think it would be
>> more useful if it were compared with 27/8, or other networks.  Is
>> this slightly worse, or significantly worse than other networks?
> 
> I have only anecdotal information regarding 45/8.
> 
> 45/8 is assigned to Interop, and as such it is brought up-and-down as Interop's shows move in and out of convention centers.  Starting at least 5 years ago, it has proved impractical to start announcing 45/8, since this causes immediate and massive amounts of traffic to flow into the show network.
> 
> The last time that I know that the full 45/8 was announced, traffic settled down to about a full T3's worth of bandwidth before the network engineers started announcing smaller /16 chunks as actually needed. Even /16 has proved impractical while the network is being built-out, before the show, because the build-out site typically has T1-ish bandwidth---again, saturated with a /16 being announced.

Just because I find it amusing timing... today I sat in a vendor presentation where he connected to his company's demo site and I smiled as I saw IP addresses in 45/8 (as well as 10/8 and others).





More information about the NANOG mailing list